Changes to: Refactored Code

@@PROCESS

443 and 444. Pair of door-handles

in the form of fishes

11.2 cms. (length of each handle)

Brass, highly polished but the backplates against the walnut door

frames with a dark brown natural patina.

Attached to, probably made for, and possibly designed for, the

walnut panelled interior doors of the Hill Music Room, which were

designed 1938 and completed 1939.

In July 1936 Alfred Hill of the firm ofwilliam E. Hill and

Chancellor with the idea of presenting to the University the

celebrated collection of early musical instruments which he

had formed with the help of his brother Arthur. The Curators

of the Bodleian Library had decided by early 1937 that they

could not find a suitable space, but the Ashmolean Museum

was interested and had allocated the Sladc lecture room to

receive the collection by the summer of 1937 (a new lecture

room was created below the Draper's Gallery, then being

planned). In October Alfred Hill first suggcstcd Allom as

architect for the conversion of the room. Hc did so on the

recommendation of F. H. H. Romaine Walker who was too

ill to take on the job himself. Allom was the `leading decorator

here and in New York'-also a noted yachtsman and golf-playcr.

Hill's first idea was for a panelled `Georgian' room

and Romaine Walker had dreamt of recreating the setting of

an eighteenth-century conversation piece, but Allom, whose

designs were probably made after the official acceptance of

the gift in June 1938, wanted to create something Italian for

what was a largely Italian collection. The plaster frieze which

he supplied, consisting of shields set in scallopcd tondi and

swags between with dainty fluttering ribbons, has a Florcntinc

quattrocento flavour. Nothing remains of his original colour

scheme except the remarkably accomplished imitation of pc7ide

¢"f¢.co for the skirting, but origivally the door frame, and

perhaps other features, were coloured to resemble P¢.e£7t¢

Jcye"¢. The design of the door frame caused considerable

acrimony. Allom wanted to give it a pediment inspired by one

on the Pazzi Chapel. Parker felt that this was inappropriate

and the Kcepcr of the Museum, E. T. Leeds, put the case

against the pediment in a letter to Allom of 5 October. Allom

replied with assurances of his extensive study of Italian art: `1

know I am right'-nd moreover Mr Hill liked his door.

Cockerell's architecture was Greek, Allom was reminded. But

Allom was able to point out that Cockcrell's work had many

Italian Renaissance features. By the end of the month the

Visitors had rcjccted the pediment. The door itself is a

handsome if conventional design and made of splendidly

figured walnut. The stylized dolphin-like fish used for the

entirely modern handles were as popular in Greece in the fifth

and fourth centuries BC as in Italy in the fifteenth and

sixteenth centuries AD. They would certainly have met with

Cockcrell's approval and seem not to have excited any

disapproval within the Museum. But then the war interrupted

the whole debate and by the time the Room was officially

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Galizia foundry, Chatficld Road, Battersea, Ijondon

After Kenneth ARMITAGE CBE (b. 1916)

@@PROCESS

445. The Bed

11.8 cms. (height); 21.4 cms. (length)

Bronze with a uniform black patina. I.ost-wax cast, the fuller foms

open below. Incised in the model at the lower edge of the taller

vertical element `2/6' and `65 KA'.

From the collection of Christophcr Hewett ( 1938-83) given to the

Museum by his family in June 1985 and included in the exhibition

celebrating the dft held in the MCAlpine Gallery in January and

February 1987 (no.12 in the catalogue). A charcoal drawing and a

photo-etching by Armitage were also included in the gift to the

Museum. Three drawings and two sculptures by him from Hcwctt's

collection were presented at the same time to the Henry Moore

Centre for the Study of Sculpture at Leeds City Art Gallery.

Armitage had exhibited at Hewett's Taranman Gallery in 1982.

The sculptor explained that this sculpture origivated in the

spectacle of a friend crossly burying her head under the bcd-linen,

thus inadvertently exposing her buttocks. `Thcre were

two different versions of this tiny piece but similar in size.

Thcrc was also a very much bigger version in white fibre-glass.'

It was cast in an edition of six in 1965. The theme of

combining human forms with furniture is found in other more

recent work by Armitage such as his three bronze Cf7¢¢.7tf (of

1981; nos.1-3 in the Taranman exhibition of 1982, where

au arc mustrated).

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Perhaps after Thomas BANKS ( 1735-1805)

@@PROCESS

446. Contemplation (Pudicitia)

42 cms. (height including integral base of 2.4 cms.)

Plaster. White discoloured to grey. Hollow cast. Some small chips

missing from head and back of base. The hollow containing a label

inscribed in pen `Presented by the Misses Bullock-Webster 1916'

and the base itself pasted with two paper labels inscribed in pen in

a hand of c.1900 `Contemplation. / modelled by / Thomas Banks.

RA. Sculptor/Born 1735 Died 1805' and `a friend of gt.

grandfather / and mother Edward & Rachel Webster / and given to

them by him / with other models and medallions / which were not

kept.' (The name is not certainly Webster.)

Given by the Misses Bullock-Webster,1916 (A""#¢/ RcPo# ( 1916),

14).

The plaster came to the Museum under the Kccpership of

C. F. Ben who claimed Banks as a forebear and was probably

already collecting the material on him which he would

eventually publish (more out of antiquarianism and piety than

any high estimate of the sculptor's ability) as A»»¢/f a/T77oov¢f

Bo»fu (Cambridge,1938). And yet in that volume no mention

is made of this statuette. Bell recognized that it was a cast of

a furly accurate copy of the portrait statue in the Vatican

Collection known as the £¢.pG.a A4:¢#G¢. or P#dG.c¢.f¢.a and much

esteemed in the eighteenth century (see F. Haskcll and N.

Penny, T¢#G ¢»d £4G A„f¢.g#c (Ijondon and New Haven,

Conn.,1981), 300-I) and he may therefore have dismissed

the legend that it was by Banks. And yet some connection

with him is likely. It might merely be a cast of a copy by

someone else which was in the sculptor's studio, but that

Banks was interested by the figure is probable, especially

when we consider his paraphrase of other notable antique

figures for the captives around the pedestal of the monument

to Captain Richard Rundell Burgess in St Paul's (the model

for which was exhibited in 1802). And that he did make

reduced and modified copies after the antique is demonstrated

by the medallions of A4lo#g¢.„g and EPG"¢.„g commissioned

from hin by Sir John Soane for the pendentivcs of the ceihng

of the Old Dividend Office in the I.othbury Court of the

Bank of England (now dcstroycd) which were based on

terracotta versions which he is said to have made in Rome

and which arc now in Sir John Soane's Museum (Bell, op.

cit. 147). Indeed the latter may well be connected with the

`models and mcdallions' mentioned on the old label. The

ways in which the plaster differs from the antique marble are

compatible with Banks's taste: the figurc's right hand is drawn

closer into her drapery, the hair and diadem are altered, the

veil falls more softly over her left shoulder, and there are

adjustments to the length of drapery falling in front of her

left arm.

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Unknown foundry

After Gilbert William BAYES ( 1872-1953)

@@PROCESS

447. Sigurd

71.9 cms. (height of bronze group); 36 cms. (length of integral

bronze plinth); 27 cms. (width of bronze plinth); 17.4 cms.

(height of marble block); 44.4 cms. (length of marble block);

28.2 cms. (width of marble block); 99.5 cms. (height of wooden

pedestal); 81 cms. (length of wooden pedestal); 43 cms. (width

of wooden pedestal)

Bronze with a dark brown patina deliberately worn to a golden

brown in some areas in relief (such as the dragon on his saddle-cloth

and the helmet ornament), with some blue and green enamel

in champleve fields of the saddle-cloth and bridle. Hollow cast, by

the sand-cast method, in pieces. The plinth was cast separately and

its underside reveals, at the points of contact with the three hoofs,

the iron armature inside the cast of the horse. The rider and horse

were cast separately, as were the parts of the bridle and saddle-cloth

decorated with enamel. In the case of the saddle-cloth this is only

apparent at the points of contact with the horse's back legs and the

hero's feet. The reins and sword strap of pliable copper are added.

The latter has been broken off: the rivet originally attaching it to

the flapping cloak remains. `GILBERT BATES / 1910' is chiselled in

the bronze across the corner of the plinth by the horse's back right

hoof. In raised letters of `Lombardic' form around the four sides of

the plinth is the following text: `He . who . would . win . to /the .

Heavens . & . bc . as . the . Gods . on . high/ must . tremble .

nought . at . /the . road . & . the . place . where . men . folk .

die'. The bronze plinth is mounted on, but unsecured to, a marble

block decorated with panels in sunk relief with some gilding now

mostly worn off, chipped, scratched, discoloured with dirt and with

red paint. This block is, in turn, mounted on, but unsccured to, a

wooden pedestal, painted to resemble stone, decorated with panels

in sunk relief. Above the higher ffieze of figures on one side arc the

names `BRyNHILD . GRIMHILD . GUDRUN' with the text above the

lower frieze: `AND . LO . THE . HoPE . oF . THE . PEol>LE ; THE

DAys . oF . A . KING . ARE . BEGUN' and on the opposite side

`GUNNAR', `HOGNI', `GOGGORM', on the banners held by the warriors

in the higher frieze. The painting on the pedestal is generally

discoloured with dirt and is also flaking. The separate wooden

elements are dividing where formerly glued and are also splitting.

Bequeathed by the Revd J. W. R Brocklebank in 1927. Acquired by

him in 1910 in substitution for an earlier cast of the same figure

(see below). The pedestal had been completed in March 1910 and

the marble base made in June in the previous year. No. I on Andrew

Shirley's receipt of January 1927.

S¢j#7i¢ was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1909 (as

no.1834, S¢j"7i¢-eg#ctrr¢.¢7? f£#f#c#G, 47io7£2;e). Bayes had

made his reputation with sculpture of horses and his interest

in Nordic mythology had been evident as carly as 1894 when

he exhibited 777c r¢.dc a/£¢G V¢/ky7p¢.cf at the Royal Academy.

S¢j#7:¢ is the hero of the E/¢Gy E¢de, a source made available

to the educated public of that period by William Morris's

vcrstror\, The Story Of Sigurd the Volsung. Here. he tildes Grey

Fell (Sft of Odin), holding aloft the maric sword Gram or

Wrath, having slain the dragon Fafhir. The dragon is

represcntcd on his helm-crest and saddle-cloth. The Branstock

tree, emblematic of the Volsung dynasty, is represcntcd in

enamel on the saddle-cloth.

Brocklebank offered £150 (presumably the asking price)

for the bronze on 17 June 1909 probably as soon as he saw

it and Bayes promptly rcplicd accepting this offer on 18 June.

This reply is the first of a series of letters from him to

Brocklebank which survive in the Department's archive.

Brocklcbank, doubtless realizing that the bronze needed to

be seen from all sides, and was, with its marble base, too large

and heavy to be placed on any existing piece of furniture,

asked the sculptor to design a pedestal for it. On 30 June

Bayes thanked Brocklebank for his cheque, observed that the

last day of the Academy exhibition is `always the Aug. Bank

Hohday', and concluded, `1 shall be roughing out the sketch

for the base shortly 8c will send it up to you.' On 17 August

he wrote, apologizing that the bronze had not returned from

the Academy when he left town but he expected to bc in

I.ondon the following week and, as soon as he had made `a

note of the carving on the marble and the colour scheme, so

that the pedestal may bc in keeping with them', hc would

have the group packed up and sent. `In the meantime I enclose

a sketch of what I propose. The carving on it is very simple

incised carving with colour introduced into the deep sunk

background of the reliefs 8c patterns.'

Brocklebank was obviously impatient and a lcttcr from

Baycs dated 25 August apolodzcs for the delay and promises

to dispatch the group on 27 August; then one of 27 August

apolodzes for it not being sent owing to a misunderstanding

but assures Brocklcbank that it will go first thing tomorrow.

`1 have had the marble 8c bronze packed separately as being

safer, the screw, nut, & stcading pin being packed with the

marble.' He added that `1 hope you received the sketch design

for the wooden pedestal that I sent you from abroad. Will

you let mc have it back when you have decided how you hke

it.' It is possible that Brocklebank was irritated by the delay

for Bayes wrote on 6 September expressing the hope that the

group had arrived safely, not having heard that it had done

so (a courtesy he would certainly have expected). In the next

letter of 24 February 1910 Baycs sincerely regrets `having

been so long upon the ``Sigurd" base but a number of

un-expected things turned up in connection with it' and

concludes that he hopes to send it within the month. On 15

March he announced that he was sending it on the following

evening.

I have lost all sense of the wood er given it a `granulated' surface as

you suggested erhave kept the top panels low in tone to lead up

to the bronze.

In the front of the base the upper panel represents the three

Niblung brothers Gunnar, Hogni, 8c Guttom; the relief below,

`the funeral of Sigurd'.

On the back are the three women Blynhild, Grimhild 8c Guchm

who had played the most important part in the life of Sigurd.

Below is the child Sigurd being taken to RIng Elf to be named,

with an inscription above `and lo, the hope of the people, the days

ofa king are begun'. On the capitals are the ravens of odin `Thought'

er'`Speech'.

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

You will find the base so solidly constructed that it will need no

further weighting, in fact I found it an advantage to have casters.

I trust you understand how sorry I am to have kept you waiting

so long, but each stage, the making, carving, gilding c?colouring

ran into more time that I had anticipated.

There was, it sccms, no reply to this from Brocklebank who

was perhaps again irritated by the delay and also by the bill

for £50 which may have accompanied Bayes's letter. `1 have

been hoping to hear from you as to whether you like the base

8c if the colouring suits the room', wrote Bayes on 3 April

with a brevity that surely also imphed that he expected

payment. On 12 April he wrote as follows:

I am in receipt of yours givam glad to hear that you think the base

suits the `Sigurd' very well.

It is unfortunate that you think it expensive at £50 as it shows

that the measure of your appreciation docs not equal the amount

of work and thought I have expended upon it.

I should myself have liked to add side panels but as it was costing

me up to the amount you wished to pay, I had reluctantly to

abandon the idea. You are probably wanting a base with much less

thought & labour 8[ would prefer to spend a lesser sum upon it.

In that case now that a suitable base has been thought out could

not your local joiner, that you mentioned, make an inexpensive one

for you leaving out the art? Doubtless a second one made from that

which is already thought out could be made more cheaply for you.

The price I had to pay for mine would astonish you I can see from

your letter.

If you decide to have a less expensive one, would you be good

enough to let me have mine back at your earliest convenience as I

will make use of it myself.

This worked, and on 20 April Bayes wrote thanking

Brocklcbank for his

letters & cheque, & expression of appreciation of `Sigurd'. I hope

as time goes on the base will further increase your liking of the

work as a whole. Should it not I will exchange it for a statuette.

I was glad to have your assurance that I had removed any doubts

you might have had as to my straightforwardness in the matter &

shall be glad to show you the work I have in my studio when you

care to pay me a visit.

I did not take much care of the little water colour sketch during

the construction of the base & damaged it while making a couple

of clay models from it.

In the meantime Bayes had made a revised version of the

group and this was exhibited at the Royal Academy (no. 1913,

Sigurd-Statuette, bron2;e and enunel). In the oritrnal S±g\ird

had held aloft the ring Andvaranant which Fafiiir had guarded.

In this version hc held his sword. Brocklcbank considered this

alteration to be an improvement. `1 will have a photograph

of Sigurd 11 sent off tomorrow', Bayes wrote to him on 18

June 1910.

It is not a very good one but was taken at the last moment before

the bronze was sent off to the Academy. I am interested to hear

you like the alteration but regret it should make you jealous.

Would you care for me to have a fourth cast made similar to the

Academy one and let you have it in place of yours?

Bayes could not offer the cast on exhibition at the Academy

because it had been purchased under the terms of the

Chantrey Bequest for the Tate Gallery (no. 2739-reserve

collection).

An undated letter of either late June or early July informed

Brocklebank that he was thinking of having another cast made

of S¢j"%¢ `for the Rome International next year Cr as I

gathered from your letter that this year's Sigurd was the

favourite I am willing to have an extra cast made for you giv

send the one you now have to the Exhibition. There will be

no extra expense involved a this arrangement will I think

please you better.'

Evidently Brocklebank agreed to this proposal and on 5

July Bayes explained that it would be thrcc or four months

before the exchange could be arranged. On 29 October he

explained that the marble base need not bc sent (so this can

be dated to 1909) and also that the new cast might take a few

days more than anticipated `as one of the smaller enamels has

bccn troublesome and requires a fresh piece casting'. The

bronze was no. 1078 in the British Section of the

International Fine Arts Exhibition.

An additional letter by Bayes concerning the group survives

in the Department's archives dated 19 December 1927 in

response to an enquiry concerlring the sculpture by Andrew

Shirley. Bayes cxplaincd that Brocklebank's bronze was a

replica of the Chantrey purchase now in the Tate Gallery

which was exhibited in 1910 but adding the information that

the `wooden pedestal was executed for Mr Brocklebank-the

following year'. It was in fact cxccuted for him in the year

following his purchase of the 1909 Academy version, as we

have seen. The whole business is made more confusing by

the fact that the most accessible published illustration of

SGj#71¢ is fig. 197, pl. CVII, of Herbert Maryon's A4lodG"

Sc#/Pfz¢7.c (I.ondon,1933), in which a bronze of the first type

is captioned as being in the Tate Gallery. On the whole the

first type-with the ring-seems to have been the most

popular and scvcral casts of it are known: one, formerly

Davis Gallery in Arundel, Sussex, in 1985 (when illustrated

in an adrcrtisemer[t in the National Art-Collections Fund

Rcp¢.ew), one was sold at Sotheby's, I.ondon, 12 April 1985

(lot 257), one remains in the Bayes family collection, and

another is in the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool. Something

of the reputation which the sculpture enjoyed for its complex

dynamism (which provides a link between the New Sculpture

and the angular realism of H. S. Jagger) is conveyed by

Maryon's praise: `probably no other equestrian group extant

. . . would better repay a prolonged study of its composition'.

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Wuan BEHNES ( 1795-1864)

@@PROCESS

448. Portrait bust of Samuel

Woodbum

67.8 cms. (height); 12.9 cms. (height of soclc); 123.2 cms. (height

of pedestal)

Carrara marble. Bust is chisellcd behind on the supporting shaft (as

li:;utalo¥t:r:::n=S!:;:stBeEdH::e/alsscou:;cro=D::i::e:2i.h:tfcie

is set on a Camra marble columnar pcdcstal made in three pieces:

base, principal shaft, and top recessed section of shaft. The pedestal

is chiseued with dlded letters: `SAMUEL WooDBURN / 1786-

1853 / THROUGH WIIOSE PUBLIC SPIRIT / THE LAWRENCE

COLLECTION / OF DRAWINGS BY / RAPHAEL AND

MICHEIANGELO / WAS SECURED FOR / THE UNIVERSITY / 1845'.

This must bc the bust, or a version of the bust, exhibited by Behnes

at the Royal Academy in 1833 (no.1201, `Marble bust, Sanucl

Woodbum, Esq. '). It was presumably commissioned by Woodbum,

and was inherited after his death in 1853 by his sister by whom it

was bequeathed to the University in 1865. Recorded in the

Donations Book on p. 54 a.s bequeathed by the sitter's `brother

Miss Woodhouse'. More correctly recorded in the H¢„dfroofe G#¢.de

of 1865 as in `the Fireproof Gallery containing the Raphacls and

Michclangelos . . . bequeathed by his sister Miss Woodbumc'. C. F.

Bell recorded in his first report as Keeper of the newly formed

Department of Fine Art in 1908 that he had set up, in niches at the

top of the principal staircase, Guelfi's busts of the Pomfiets (scc

Nos. 516, 517), and, in the same spirit of institutional piety, `an

appropriate inscription was cut upon the base of Samuel Woodbum

by W. Behncs, which has been placed in another of the niches'-

prcsunably the central one subsequently occupied by the /#¢¢.*¢

(No. 473) and now by the E¢#/ a/Ar#"de/ (No. 472). The bust was

cleaned by REthleen Kimber and C. P. Bartram of the Department

of Antiquities in the 1970s.

A ful account of woodburn's part in the acquisition of the

drawings by Raphael and Michelangelo, formerly in the

collection of sir Thomas Lawrence, is given in Sir Karl Parker's

introduction to his catalogue of the Ashmolean's Italian

drawings. Woodbun bought the great collection of drawings

(which he had himself helped Lawrence to fom) after

Lawrence's executors falcd to dispose of them as I.awrence

had hoped. Then, in accordance with I.awrence's wishes, but

with a patience Lawrence could not have anticipated,

Woodburn delayed selling them in case they could bc placed,

as the group by Raphael and Michelangelo eventually were,

in a public institution.

In 1832 Behnes was at the height of his powers, but already

encountering some financial difficulties. Bankrupt in 1861,

he died, a pauper in the Middlesex Hospital, three years later,

a year before this bust was presented.

10

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Sir Joseph Edgar BOEHM (Joscf 86hm) ( 1834L90)

@@PROCESS

449. Portrait bust of John Ruskin

59.5 cms. (height)

Terracotta, hollow slip-cast as one piccc (including waisted square

soclc). The interior is a hot orange colour, the exterior toned with

a paler clay slip applied in very liquid form (granules are caught in

whiskers and hairs on proper left side of face). Incised `BOEHM fecit',

the `fecit' partially illcdble. The indistinct lettering, like the bluntness

of details such as buttonholes, suggests that there was little hand-finishing

after casting. The shirt-collar to proper left has bccn

chipped.

Presented by T. W. G. Acland in 1932, in accordance with the wishes

of his father, Dr Thcodore Dyke Acland, who had died in April

1932. Dr Acland had presumably inherited it from his father,

Ruskin's ffiend Sir Henry Wentworth Acland Bt. (see No. 549).

T. W. G. Acland wrote to the Director of the Taylor Institution

offering the bust on 17 February 1932, and then sent a copy on 20

April, having had no reply. The Secretary of the Taylorian called on

the Kccper of the Ashmolean (E. T. Lecds) on 22 April. heeds

wrote to Acland explaining that he must have intcndcd the

Ashmolean not the Taylorian and asking him to walt until Mr Clark,

Keeper of the Department of Fine Art, returned from abroad. Leeds

then forgot about the matter. Acland wrote again on 6 October.

Lecds replied on 10 October saying that Clank would like to know

more about it. Clearly there was some uncertainty as to the

desirabilfty of the gift (the marble version being already in the

Museum). However, on 23 October Grace Muirhead, who had

bccn housing the bust, wrote that she would deliver it to the

Museum on the following day and would collect it later if it were

not wanted. It was never collected.

The plaster version of Boehm's statue of Ruskin's hero Carlyle,

which was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1875, was

praised by Ruskin in high terms in his Ac¢dc7„y Nofcf for that

year ( Wo#fa, 39 vols., Library Edition (London, 1903-12),

xiv. 288-9) as `a noble piece of portraiture' recording both

`mind and features' of `my dear master'. Ruskin approved of

Boehm's style as an alternative to the `Hellenic academy

sculpture'. He was taken by Carlyle to Boehm's studio where

the sculptor delighted him-`f#c¢ a duck-the very ideal of

noblest intense Germanism', he wrote to Mrs Severn on 26

June; `a jewel, not a Jew. A perfect type of intense blue-eyed

Harz-bred Germany', hc wrote to Charles Eliot Norton on

15 July (ibid. xxxvii. 169). Although born in Vienna, Boehm

was in fact of Hungarian extraction. Ruskin hoped Boehm

would ask to `do' him, but the first mention of a sitting comes

in a letter, probably of November 1879, to his friend Dr Henry

Acland (later Sir Henry): `For the bust I shall only be too

trad to sit to Boehm anywhere and any time hc likes, and

will stay in town as long as necessary.' On 1 December that

year he informed Miss Sara Anderson that he was going `over

to Kensington every day to Boehm for clay yet more "like"

than Herkhomer'. Alfred Gilbert, then acting as Bochm's

assistant, recaued (or claimed to recall) the comedy of trying

to conceal busts of Millais from Ruskin and busts of Ruskin

from Millais (I. MCAllister, A//rc¢ GG./4G# (I.ondon, 1929),

34-5). When asked by Marion Harry Spielmann for

recollections of the sittings, Boehm would reveal nothing but

did claim that he `never saw any face on which the character

and the inside of the man was so clearly written. He can never

have tried to dissimulate' (`Some Portraits of John Ruskin',

A4¢g#2;¢.„c a/A# ( 1891 ),122). Ruskin himself was a little

uneasy about the bust, describing it as of `extreme and, more

than I quite like, historical veracity' ( 777G Br¢7¢n.7ood DG.¢7rfef

a/7o4» A"jfe¢.79, ed. H. G. Viljoen (New Haven, ConTri.,1971 ),

@@PROCESS

535).

The bust was first exhibited in terracotta at the Royal

Academy exhibition in 1880 (no.1635) and it has been

assumed that this is the version now in the Ashmolcan

M:usoum (M. Stockel. Royalist and Realist: The itfie a,nd

Work Of Sir Joseph Edyar Boehm (INow Yock and I+ondon,

1988), 411). A flyshcct was published in Oxford on 27 May

1880 drawing attention to a full-length sketch in clay, also to

bust portraits one of which was on view at the Royal Academy

(as mentioned above), the other on view in the Turner Room

at the University Galleries. `Friends have cxpresscd a desire

that a statue of the author of A4lo¢e77¢ P#¢.7¢£g7tf should bc

placed in the School of Drawing, Oxford, which owes its

existence to his generosity and bears his name.' An appeal for

subscriptions had been pubhshed in 777c T¢.owcf on the day

before, with Prince Leopold and the marquess of salisbury

among the conimittcc members. The scheme, engivecred by

Acland, did not cnd in triumph. `Ultimately a marble bust

was placed in the Ruskin Drawing School', Ruskin's editors

observe.

The marble bust survives in the present premises of the

Ruskin School in the High Street. It is notably more precise

in detail than the terracotta version in the Ashmolean, showing

for example the buttonholes of the lapel more clearly and

even the rclicf stitching around them. It is also larger in size,

being 64 cms. high, on a soclc with a plinth 19 cms. square.

This proves that the Ashmolean's terracotta is not the origival

clay model (if that survived) but was made from the plaster

cast of that origival clay, which would also have served as the

prototype for the marble-whereas the marble would have

turned out the same size as that plaster cast, the terracotta

cast would have shrunk in firing. At least two terracottas were

made: two are recorded today, that in the Ashmolean Museum

and one in a private collection in Ijondon. There may well

be others. A bronze cast is said to be in the Geelong Art

Gallery, Victoria, Australia, a plaster cast is in the National

Portrait Gallery, I.ondon (Stockcr, op. cit. 411 ), and another

is in the Ruskin Gallery, Sheffield. Such plaster casts could

bc made from the moulds used for the terracotta edition, but

only after the latter had been completed, since the greasy

parting agent placed in the interior of the assembled mould

for casting plasters rcndcrcd it unfit for the clay, which needed

to be dried by contact with untreated plaster (a process

explained by Boehm in a letter of 31 December 1878 to

Thomas Dixon quoted by Stocker, op. cit. 232). If, as would

seem likely, the bust in the Ruskin School of Drawing is the

only version in marble, then it was the one exhibited by

Bochm at the Grosvenor Gallery in 1881. There seems to bc

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

no evidence that it was executed previous to the subscription

in 1880. The clay sketch for a full-length statue has not been

traced.

Ruskin continued to be impressed by Boehm's work and

gave him a commission for `twelve flat medallions, Florentine

manner, life size, of six British men ind six British women, of

typical character in beauty; all to be looking straight forward

in pure profile, and to have their hair treated with the Grcck

furrow' (letter to Charles Eliot Norton of 25 February 1884,

Library Edition of Wo7ilef, xxxvii. 475). Nothing, however,

seems to have come of this, Boehm being frantically

overworked and Ruskin of uncertain mental health.

Bochm's bronze portrait of Acland, dated 1887, is in the

University Museum.

12

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Domenico Brucciani and Company, I.ondon

After Sir Joseph Edgar BOEHM (Josef 86hm) ( 1834-90)

@@PROCESS

450. Thoroughbred gelding

39 cms. (height including wire armature of ear);

32.8 cms. (length of base); 11.3 cms. (width of base)

Plaster. Solid cast. Seams from piece-mould unremoved. The tail

partially broken, the ears broken off to expose wire armature, the

fore legs chipped, the near one badly, exposing thicker wire armture.

Scratched on the base of the plaster with bold angular capital letters:

`D BRuCCIANI 8c Co LONDON 276.' Plaster now very dirty.

Transferred from the basement store of the Department of

Antiquities in 1986. Possibly residue of the teaching collection of

the Ruskin School of Drawing.

The firm of Brucciani were the leading suppliers of plaster

casts in Ijondon in the last century (for a sketch of the firm's

history see F. Haskell and N. Penny, L'¢7¢f¢.co „e//¢ f}o".a de/

gusto (T\iri]n. \984). L44-5). A Catalogtte Of Sculgture ky D.

Brmcciani, 40 Russell St., Covent Garden, `indated but

rectstcred in libraries in 1880, and so certainly published by

then, includes an introduction drawing attention to a `New

and Unique Collection of Animals by eminent Artists in Paris,

8cc', including horses by `Monti, Fraton, Macarthy, Lady

Dacre, Galnsborough, Mane [f¢.c], Rosa Bonheur' which arc

then hsted on pp. 48-50. The line appears to have been a

success and, after Boehm's death in 1890, the firm included

casts after the highly successful bronze portraits of horses that

hc had made popular with the English aristocracy. In the

Catalogtte Of Casts fior Schools which the Board of Edttcation

Co„f¢.de7tf S#¢.£4b4/G/or Scfroo/f, undated but issued by the fim

previous to 1906, no. 276 (as also no. 275) was a horse by

Boehm costing los. 6d. No. 276 was still on offer in the

1914 catalogue.

Perhaps by the factory in Soho, near Birmingham, of Matthew

BOULTON ( 1728-1809)

@@PROCESS

451 and 452. Pair of obelisks

42.85 cms. (height); 8.85 cms. (length and width of plinths)

the pedestals consisting of separate blocks, the tapering

obelisks themselves of three pieces. The plinth, the leaf-moulding

above it, the platform above the pedestal, the corner ornaments of

acanthus, the two bands of guilloche ornament concealing the joins

in the obelisks, the capping, and the cone finial are in each case

composed of a separate clement of bronze, fire-gilded. The elements

have been reassembled in this century in a manner that makes

examination impossible. `Bouch Bequest 1963' is painted in black

on the underside of each plinth.

Bequeathed by Major T. Bouch, 1963. Received by the Museum

on 20 November 1963. For more on the bequest see No. 469. Lent

to the City Art Museum, Derby, on 27 May 1981.

Neither the workmanship nor the design of these obelisks is

of very high quality, but it is comparable with the more

routine productions of Matthew Boulton's Soho factory (for

which see No. 608). The separate pieces of fluorspar appear

to have come from the same block for the same bands of dark

mauve are in both cases continued through the different

pieces. There is no mention in the Boulton archives of the

production of obelisks at Soho but some are mentioned in

carly sales and there are drawings in the pattern book; the

latter do not correspond to these but Sir Nicholas Goodison

regards the components as very close to Boulton's work and

`would be inclined to think that the obelisks came from his

factory' (letter of 19 June 1989).

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Probably Gcorgc BULLOCK ( 1782/3-1818)

After Gcrard Janscn and another

@@PROCESS

453 and 454. Masks of shakespeare

and an unbearded male, probably

Wri||iam Wordsworth

28.5 cms. (height of mask of shakespeare); 38.5 cms. (height of

support for Shakespeare); 30.7 cms. (width of support for

Shakespeare); 27.8 cms. (height of ?Wordsworth); 38.2 cms.

(height of support for .>Wordsworth); 30.5 cms. (width of

support for .>Wordsworth)

Plaster of Paris discolourcd from ingrained dirt. There are scratches

especially to the head of wordsworth (No. 454). The heads have

bccn cast separately and stuck to the supports. There is an old break

across the support for the Shakespeare mended with cement and a

more recent break across the proper right top comer of the

companion bust which has been mended with glue. Wire rings are

attached to the backs of both supports.

Provenance unrecorded but thcsc are perhaps the `plaster portrait

reliefs of "Comtc Chambord" and "Tasso" ' included in an old

typed list mostly of miniatures, headed `Portraits &c' in the `Mcd.

Room' which was signed by E. T. heeds, Keeper of the Dcpartmcnt

of Antiquities, on 12 March 1932. The T¢so was specified as the

Sft of Mrs Stonehouse in 1915. It is more probably connected with

`A plaster mask of the poet Wordsworth, taken from the life in 1815.

Presented by Miss [ Elizabeth ] Wordsworth' ( RGPo77 a/ £¢c 4cGPGr a/

the Picture Galleries (+905). 8\).

The cabinet maker and sculptor George Bullock was

commissioned by the antiquarian John Britton to make a cast

of the half-length effigy of shakespeare by Gcrard ]ansen in

the Church of Holy Trinity, Stratford-upon-Avon, in 1814:

the work was accomplished with some difficulty in Dcccmbcr

of that year. A mezzotint by W. Ward ARA after the painting

by Thomas Phillips RA after the cast by Bullock was pubhshcd

on 23 April 1816 to celebrate the bicentenary of the poct's

death. (An impression of this rare print is in the Hope

Collection in the Ashmolcan Museum.) Casts survive in the

Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool, in the Soane Museum, and at

Avon, is of the head and shoulders only. (For these see

Chive wdrr[wrigivl (ed.), George Bttlloch, Cabinet Maker

(Ijondon,1988), mos.15, 67, 68, pp. 77-8,141-2.) This cast

of the front of the head of shakespeare appears to be made

from the sane mould: it is particularly close to that at

Abbotsford although even more dull in its surface. There is

another such mask in the National Portrait Gallery, I.ondon

(in reserve, 185 A), framed and with the support painted

black. It was presented by Albcrt Way FSA (d.1874). The

identity of the other portrait has not been established for

certain. It is likely to bc another eminent poet and bears a

very slight resemblance to Milton (Spenccr might be

suspected but he is always depicted with a beard). The best

candidate is Wordsworth. It is known that a mask of

Wordsworth supposedly taken from life in 1815 was presented

to the Museum in 1905 (as mentioned above). This might

have been made by Bullock, who is known to have been

interested in finding modem companions for his Shakcspearc

and cast the head of Sir Walter Scott for this reason. The high

brow, prominent eyebrows, long straight nose, and spare hair

parted near the centre all correspond with the portrait of

Wordsworth painted by Boxan. If this is correct then it is

curious that the companion mask of Shakespeare is not

mentioned in the Museum's records.

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Attributed to D. CARDOSI (active mid-ninctecnth century)

After Franz Thaller and Matthias Ranson

@@PROCESS

455. Bust portrait of Admiral Lord

Nelson

66.2 cms. (height including integral socle)

Plaster of Paris. Hollow cast with very thin walls. The seams of the

piece-mould are very evident. The thin shell of plaster is perforated

below the proper left epaulette and on the top of the head to proper

right. The plaster is discoloured with ingrained din but the face

appears to have been dehibcrately coloured a golden brown, perhaps

from a light coat of shellac applied only in this area.

Provenance unrecorded.

Nelson sat to the Austrian sculptor Franz Thaller when he

was in Vienna in August and September 1800 at the same

time that hc was being painted by Hcinrich Friedrich Ftiger.

A life cast may also have been supplied to the sculptor. The

completed marble bust, which is now in the National Maritime

Museum, is inscribed `Franz Thaller ct Matthias Ranson

Vicnnac Aust. MDCCCI' and was sent to I.ondon in that

year. It was extensively copied and also served as the model

for Flaxman's statue on the hero's tomb in St Paul's Cathedral.

A bronzed plaster cast with the seams removed is in the

National Portrait Gallery with the name D. Cardosi Scratched

on the balck. (R. Walker. Regeney Portraits, National Portrait

G¢//cry (Ilondon, 1985), i. 362, no. 2668, ii, pl. 2734).

Vestidal seams on this plaster correspond with those which

arc very evident on the Ashmolean bust. The size is the same,

as is the soclc (which is square in the marble). Cardosi is

likely to have been an Italian /o777¢¢}orG working in I.ondon.

Hc is not othcrwisc recorded. The thin shell of the cast

suggests a date in the second half of the ninctcenth century.

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

Sir Francis CHANTREY ( 1781-1841 )

@@PROCESS

456. Sketch model for a statue of

Mrs Dorothy Jordan with her

children

31 cms. (height)

Terracotta (possibly un fired clay)

The University Gallery Donations Book records, in February 1863,

the bequest of a `Miss Jones' consisting of copies made by her of

Correggio, a 4¢jj.a-ri/G.ova of Queen Adelalde by Sir Francis Chantrey,

and `a small sketch in clay for the statue of Mrs Jordan and her

children'. The group has often been assumed to have been a part of

the Chantrey gift of 1842. Miss Jones may well have been related

to the sculptor's friend and biographer George Jones whose widow

presented works to the University Galleries in April 1873. The

sculpture was given an incorrect provenance in the catalogue of the

chlkji:riron Sir Francis Cha!mrey 1781-1841: Sculptor of the Great

(I.ondon, National Portrait Gallery, and Mappin Art Gallery,

Sheffield,1981), no. 28.

Very few sketch models survive by English sculptors of this

period. This resembles, in colour of clay and summary

handling, Chantrey's model for the Bishop Hcber monument

(Victoria and Albert Museum, A. 29-1933). The completed

marble, now in Buckingham Palace, represents Mrs Jordan

with a different hairstyle, more ample drapery, and attributes

of pipes and a mask by her feet to indicate her profession. She

is also feeding an infant rather than carr)ing a sleeping one.

Mrs Jordan, who had been the mistress of william, duke of

Clarence, and had borne him ten children, died in poverty in

Paris in 1816. The commission, the cost of 2,000 guineas,

and the proposed location in Westminster Abbey were

entered in the sculptor's ledger in 1831. Other sources enable

us to be more exact about the date of the commission of this

monument and also reveal the uncertainty concerning its

location.

A letter by Maria Edgeworth to her mother of 5 January

1831 states that `the king has just sent for Chantrey and

bespoken a monument for Mrs Jordan-to be put up where

she died near Paris!' (M. Edgeworth, Lc#G7:t/yoow E"g/¢„d,

JBJ3-44, ed. C. Colvin (Oxford,1971), 462). Chantrey

rccaued how anxious the king was about the memorial and

how concerned to hear his `opinion what it should be, &

where it should be placed'|hantrey not being able to help

much with the latter enquiry, the king `then went into a

thousand particularitics of their private life, always ending

that she had been an cxccuent mother to her children. He

said he knew he had been much blamed for his conduct to

her, but that from the time they parted he had allowed

2,000 I a year, which was regularly paid cvcry quarter,

although often with great difficulty to himself to find the

mane+/' Uounals and Correspondence Of Miss Bell.ry, ed. La:dy

Tcresa Lewis (Ijondon,1865), iii. 4634r-ntry for 25 July

1839, recalling a conversation with the sculptor the previous

evening). The marble group was completed in 1834 and, on

the king's death, was inherited by the first earl of Munster,

Mrs Jordan's eldest surviving son.

16

BRITISH SCULPTURES, BY ARTIST'S NAME

CHELSEA factory

@@PROCESS

457. Head of a lauching child

19 cms. (height); 11.9 cms. (width across opening of neck);

o.8 cms. ( approximate thickness of porcelain wall)

Soft-paste porcelain, glazed and decorated with enamel colours. Pink

orange is employed for lips and mouth, and the corners of the eyes,

and also more funtly for the cheeks and elsewhere in the flesh. A

lilac grey is employed for the hair (in hatched lines of varied intensity

gving the impression of a tortoiseshell pattern), for the upper eyelids